Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Thursday, September 07, 2006
George Will :: Townhall.com Columnist
A crisis for Japan's welfare state
by George Will
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


TOKYO -- Longevity is a blessing, but the Japanese live inconveniently long lives. Inconvenient, that is, for those who administer Japan's welfare state.

Welfare states are made possible by the productivity of modern economies, which make possible living conditions -- improved nutrition, hygiene, housing, medical care, education, environment -- that increase life expectancy. That increase threatens the solvency of welfare states, because the elderly receive most government transfer payments -- pensions and medical care.

The life expectancy of Japanese women (85.5) is the world's highest and that of men (78.5) is behind only Hong Kong and Switzerland. The median age here is 41.2, compared to 36.5 in America, and is projected to be 49.5 in 2050, when 37 percent of the population -- twice today's rate -- will be more than 65. And 41.7 percent will be more than 60, compared with 26.4 percent in America.

Japan, which has closed 4,000 schools in the last 20 years, has a fertility rate -- the number of children per woman of childbearing age -- of 1.32. The replacement rate, which keeps population from shrinking, is 2.1. Last year, deaths exceeded births by 21,408. The U.S. fertility rate is barely at replacement level, but immigration is one reason why demographer Nicholas Eberstadt expects America to be the ``only industrialized country to hold its share of global population in the next half century.''

Japan has never been welcoming toward immigrants. Shinzo Abe, who almost certainly will become prime minister this month, says he wants a Japan where ``people in other parts of the world would like to live'' and ``become citizens.'' But other senior officials say the way to square a declining population and work force with the pension costs of long-lived retirees is to rethink retirement -- to ``work for life,'' one official says.

Another says of immigration that it is wrong to import workers to do ``hard, risky jobs. Hardships should be shouldered by the Japanese themselves.'' And, he asks, ``Why should we increase our population?'' Leaving aside the welfare state's grinding imperatives, that is not a foolish question. In 1920, Japan's population was 56 million. Today it is 127.5 million on a landmass the size of California (population 36 million) that is three-quarters mountainous. A third official, noting that Japan imports 60 percent of its staple foods, says, ``It might be good to have a declining population'' of, say, 100 million by 2050.

But the welfare state's imperatives cannot be ignored, and the Japanese will not dismantle that state. So the alternative is to pursue increased revenues from rapid economic growth achieved by sacrificing equity, understood as job security and other entitlements, in the interest of efficiency. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
George F. Will is a 1976 Pulitzer Prize winner whose columns are syndicated in more than 400 magazines and newspapers worldwide.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read George Will's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: snotonmyscreen
Don't let the door knob hit you on your way out.

DavidMac
I'm afraid you're a bit wet on this one, although some of the distinctions you make are technically sound.

First of all, with regard to "GENETICALLY" living longer, what would normally be called maximum life span, you are correct that this has not changed. However, George Will never implied that it had, nor did he imply that Japanese are somehow genetically superior with respect to life expectancy. The figures he quoted are indeed relevant, because when dealing with social spending for the elderly, it is the percentage of the population expected to be over a given "retirement age" that matters. He provided that number.

In theory, your argument about life expectancy at birth vs. life expectancy upon attaining adulthood could be relevant if the child mortality rates for the two countries were vastly different. They are not. I did a little checking on age-adjusted life expectancy and found the following numbers for age 30 based upon mortality statistics from 2003:
(the numbers indicated average ADDITIONAL years expected)

US white male: 47.0
US all other male: 41.9
Japanese male: 49.23

US white female: 51.5
US all other female: 47.9
Japanese female: 55.97

So the same life expectancy trend at birth also holds even after
excluding child mortality. It would be completely unjustified to conclude
on these statistics that Japanese are genetically predisposed to longer
life spans. The level of medical care is fairly similar for both countries,
but lifestyles also matter, and they are not the same for the two
populations.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.